Adox MCP 310 - multigrade filters: no effect

[falleri]

I recently got back into working in the darkroom. I bought Adox and Ilford paper and printed stuff for an exhibition in the darkroom of my old academy. The Adox paper I used there was MCC 110 (fb), 24x30, for portraits. I did notice using filters did little to nothing to the contrast but as it had been.. what, 8 years probably since I had been in a darkroom, and I had a deadline and spent most of my time on the most important prints, for which I used 50x60 fb ilford paper, got little sleep and whatever, I guess I just kind of dismissed it as 'new to it again and must be me'.

Now that I have a darkroom at home again I bought some more paper, PE this time. Adox MCP 310 and Ilford multigrade PE paper.
I was using the larger ilford paper most of the time, but when I wanted to show my intern the differences between filter 2, 3, 4 and 5, we used the smaller Adox paper, as it was just to clarify and show him what it would do.. and boy was I feeling stupid. There was NO difference. None.

At first I thought, it must be me. So I triple checked. Had my husband listen to me while I recounted the steps. Then I did a test with the ilford paper. That did show a difference.. so there must be something wrong with the paper or with the paper and ... (fill in the gap please) combination.

If anyone here has a clue I'd love to hear it. I really have no idea what could cause this.

I'm using a Kaiser enlarger with built-in multigrade filter system (VPM6005), Amaloco AM6006 developer. Have a Philips PF710E safelight that should be ok with the paper, tested it, but haven't done a preflash test yet (I know, I can be so lazy sometimes, but I can't imagine this could be the problem; prints all look the same as prints on ilford, no fogging, contrast is fine, they just all look like I've used filter 2.. or no filter, regardless of what I used)

Maybe I'm missing something obvious.. I posted this question on the adox facebook page as well (no answer yet). Google has not given me anything. But maybe I am not searching correctly. I just don't know what I'm looking for here.. :(

[pau3]

I imagine you have double checked it, but, are you sure you did turn the filters on
before the exposure? I mean, you probably lift them for focusing and you may have
forgotten putting them down. It happens to me from time to time.

You could also check the filtering system using external filters. Put them under
the lens, and check that the results are consistent with the filters on the enlarger.
However, if it works with Ilford paper and does not with Adox, probably the Adox paper
is not working.

[falleri]

Hi Pau, thanks for you reply! Yes, I triple-checked.. and had my husband watch my every move so I had an extra set of eyes to see if I missed any steps. I now have several unnecessary test prints
By the way I usually do focus with the filter too, just to be sure. But yes, I was doubting myself, thinking it must have been me.. but really it wasn't.

Anyway, indeed, if the internal filters work with ilford paper it can't be the problem, right? Also I can really see the difference when I turn them on, it's quite obvious as you can see the image being projected with a magenta color.. so the filters work.
I don't have external filters so I can't check that, but I can't imagine it would make a difference. I'm at a loss here :S and don't understand how I can have this problem with paper that's being sold as multigrade, that is supposed to work with my filter system etc., and other people apparently don't encounter this problem..? So there must be something wrong, but what?

[sepiareverb]

And it was Adox MCC, not the graded version? (Nuance I think it is called).

[Muggins]

I think you've already discounted this, and my experience was with an enlarger with a dichroic head where the colour balance of the light controls the contrast, but I'll throw it in anyway - in case it helps anyone happening across this thread later on.

I had a similar experience with an Ilford 500H (I think) multigrade enlarger. In that case, I discovered that one of the two bulbs in the head wasn't working (bad contact) so there was no light at the high-contrast end of the spectrum, and everything was coming out at grade 0. That was definitely the enlarger rather than the paper.

Good luck beating this!

Adrian

[falleri]

Originally Posted by sepiareverb

And it was Adox MCC, not the graded version? (Nuance I think it is called).

I hope attaching the image works, I'm still new to everything here
It's variable contrast paper for sure. I did the tests here with MCP310. The 13x18 paper on top. The larger portraits were on MCC110 in another darkroom and I'm not sure if there really was a difference when I used filters, I do know there was definitely not enough effect when using them there, but I didn't need extreme filtering so I never really bothered thinking about it, shrugged it off, was just too busy getting everything done before the deadline.. (it was a close one but I managed) And I tested the filters here with the Ilford multigrade paper, 24x30 version of that stack in the image.

Originally Posted by Muggins

I think you've already discounted this, and my experience was with an enlarger with a dichroic head where the colour balance of the light controls the contrast, but I'll throw it in anyway - in case it helps anyone happening across this thread later on.

I had a similar experience with an Ilford 500H (I think) multigrade enlarger. In that case, I discovered that one of the two bulbs in the head wasn't working (bad contact) so there was no light at the high-contrast end of the spectrum, and everything was coming out at grade 0. That was definitely the enlarger rather than the paper.

Good luck beating this!

Adrian

Well, I was actually thinking about something like this, but that would mean using filters wouldn't work with my ilford paper either, right? (I can't imagine that would be the case as they do work with ilford paper, then again, what do I know? I've never encountered something like this before, so I'm open to all suggestions!)

[sepiareverb]

I've read of incompatibility between certain papers and certain filter systems, this could be that. I used a Zone VI VC coldlight for a while that was terrible in the range of contrast it produced on several papers- like less than a whole grade instead of 5 grades or more. I've never had problems with ADOX & Ilford papers with the filters on my LPL. I use the same Ilford MG & Adox papers as you have there.

[falleri]

Haha, I just noticed your signature very nice.

I'm afraid it must be something like that, that would be a big disappointment.. not that I mind using ilford paper, it's not that much more expensive and I can get my hands on it much easier as well, but still, I don't like not having the options, you know. Will be quite disappointing for my poor intern too as he wanted to try and buy cheaper paper. So far there aren't any other options that will work with my safelight, or none that I have found so far, and I'm not going to find another safelight for him.. Just got my hands on two Osram Duka 10 Studio lamps, very nice, but if I'm correct the paper from Foma and Rollei require red safelight and so far these are the only other brands I've been able to find in webshops here and in Germany.

Anyway, too bad.

If anyone else has any ideas, please let me know. By the way it IS strange, as the Adox info sheet that came with the paper mentions ilford filters and even color enlargers are possible, you should be able to use the yellow and magenta filters and I did that at the art academy darkroom, with adox as well, so I can't imagine how the filters in my enlarger are different after all, magenta is magenta, yellow is yellow, mostly, right? (oh this is driving me insane, I keep thinking in circles)

[Roger Hicks]

Roger passed this over to me and I too am puzzled. I assume you used the same developer on all the two paper tests, and that it was fresh for both tests. I have seen exhausted developer nullify any change in contrast, but if you used it first with Adox, then with Ilford, and the second lot of results worked, then it is not that. I have however driven myself crazy at times with exhausted developer! It ceases to give good contrast changes long before it ceases to give prints that are otherwise acceptable.

The only Adox paper I have used has behaved impeccably; MCP 312 and MCP 310. My experience of it isn't that recent though: not since I got hooked on Ilford 300 ART.

Cheers,

Frances

[pau3]

I'm just guessing, but the Philips PF710E safelight you mention is yellow-green.
Are you sure that the yellow is not lowering the contrast? It may happen that
the Ilford papers are less sensitive to that light, since you can use orange filters
with them. Red lights are safer, mainly if you can put them far from
the enlarger.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by pau3

I'm just guessing, but the Philips PF710E safelight you mention is yellow-green.
Are you sure that the yellow is not lowering the contrast? It may happen that
the Ilford papers are less sensitive to that light, since you can use orange filters
with them. Red lights are safer, mainly if you can put them far from
the enlarger.

Or even if you can't. On Frances's tests, her favoured red lights (Paterson) were safe after half hour a foot (30cm) from Ilford paper. I always hesitate to tell people that my wife likes working under a red light...

Cheers,

R.

[falleri]

A quick reply- I just tested the Adox paper without the safelight (interesting to work in complete darkness :S) and again, no difference in filter 2 and 5. So, the safelight can't be the problem

Will check back later and respond to the rest!

[sevo]

Probably fixed-gradation paper mis-packed in a multi-contrast box.

If the safelight would fog one of the two emulsions to maximum, the paper would be black, by the way, not exclusively exposed in the other layer. Cancellation effects do exist, but these will only be very subtle (like blown highlights) in the intensities of safe light available from any photographic darkroom lamp. Now, if you use a 250W+ Sodium vapour lamp as once commonly used in lithography labs, such a effect could happen - I've seen these fade exposed paper to blank if left about undeveloped for a few minutes.

[sepiareverb]

I have rather dim safelights and I have OC (amber) filters. I've used all kinds of papers that 'require' red safelights without any fogging. Safelight test of a Slavich paper (that lovely silk finish) was still completely clear after 30 minutes- even on pre-fogged paper. I've decided that intensity is the real killer. I've placed sheets of ND filtration in the safelights over the developer & stop trays and use 7W night-light bulbs in all my lights. I do miss the 5W bulbs I used to be able to get. My darkroom doesn't seem dark, I've worked in darker ones (and not just color ones )

Do you have access to any sheet filters (like the Ilford multi-contrast set?) That could show if it is the paper or the head.

I'm leaning towards sevo's explanation- somehow mis-packaged paper. I don't doubt that ADOX would replace it if that is the case. The hours are another matter...

[pau3]

I agree with sevo and sepiareverb. A simple test would be to use any other variable
contrast paper or another batch of the same one. The difference between a grade 2
filtration and a grade 5 one is huge.

[falleri]

Ok, I'm back. I will make a list of what I checked.

>tests with both adox and ilford paper under the exact same circumstances; filter 2 and 5, same developer and safelight, ilford clearly shows a difference, adox none.

>test with adox paper- one using filter 2 and one using filter 5- processed in complete darkness, no safelight, turned that on after the paper was properly fixed. No difference. Means it can't be the safelight.. (I'm careful with my paper, it had not been pre-exposed to the safelight either)

>I don't have an Ilford filter set so I can't try external filters for now. However I can't imagine the problem lies in the built-in filters. They clearly show normal filter colors, yellow, magenta, when projecting the image and they affect Ilford paper. If I find a set of Ilford filters for an ok price I might check it out.. but for now, not an option.

>Developer AM 6006 should be fine for multigrade papers. Haven't read anything so far that indicates it wouldn't work with adox.

>Paper is new. Not old stock. White is white, no fogging and the contrast looks fine apart from not being adjustable of course. Then again, I bought it new about a month ago and I don't know how long it's been in storage before that but I can't imagine it would be the problem. A friend of mine came over yesterday to print some stuff and he had old paper. That clearly showed in the whites.. there were none, and in the contrast.. there was no contrast. (quite extreme)

I think that was about it.
So.. what's left is;

>Just to be sure, the enlarger lamp. My husband insisted it was the right lamp and I'm inclined to believe him since it works fine with the ilford paper.. but still: Osram HLX Xenophot 64627, 12V 100W. That's what was in there when I bought it.
Enlarger: Kaiser VPM 6005

>I want to test the Adox fb paper I have to see if it gives me the same problems here. If not, it might indeed be paper in the wrong package..
If yes, I'm stuck!

I will try the fb paper as soon as I have time. If anyone knows of any problems with the enlarger lamp let me know.. and if there are any other suggestions I'd love to hear them as well. I'd rather exclude everything before I ask Adox for a refund or whatever. And yes, won't get me the hours of testing etc. back... don't even want to think about that.. oh well.

Sepiareverb, I love that darkroom! Wow. Mine is a work in progress, so the trays are on a table covered in plastic, awaiting something more convenient.. more sink-like.. Maybe some day.

Thanks everyone for trying and thinking with me!

[sepiareverb]

This indeed sounds like mis-packaged paper. Even without optimum filtration there would still be changes. I make proofsheets and the occasional print on some old MCC Single-Weight paper from the first Adox MCC coating (The SW was a test roll). This is old enough to have some base fog, so needs Benzotriazole to produce clean whites, but I still have a good range of contrast in it.

Testing with the Fiber paper seems the next step.

I'm in the darkroom about 20 hours a week, and have built seven or eight of them over the years. This one is coming with me when I move.

[falleri]

Indeed, I'll try the fb test first. But can't do that today unfortunately. Maybe I'll have some time tomorrow. Too many appointments at the moment and starting everything up for an hour or so is too much of a hassle for me. When I start working in the darkroom I usually end up cleaning up after 11 (pm). And I can't clean the trays in the darkroom yet, unfortunately. I prefer working there for lots of hours, more efficient for me (I hate the cleaning part. I have to admit.. my husband is too sweet, he often helps me, even when it's late.)

I can imagine you'd want a workable darkroom. I must admit I think right now I'm spending about the same or even more time in the darkroom each week.. so I'm looking forward to more efficiency. Mine is in the attic though with sloping walls (I hope I'm saying that correctly) so I can't have the neat looking cupboards you have for example. And there's boxes, storage etc. in the lower areas so it doesn't look all that great

I checked out Roger and Frances' website, love the idea of having those nova processors!

[oftheherd]

Lots of ideas so far. Give that different papers may have slightly different characteristics, it might be worth while to change out the enlarger bulb(s). I expect that is a bit of a long shot, but you are running out of options. And if that isn't it, you will have a spare bulb(s) so you won't have down time if you lose a bulb. Sevo's idea sounds as reasonable as any other. If you get Adox's interest, you might see if they are willing to test a sheet if you send it to them.

Has Adox not replied yet?

[falleri]

Hi oftheherd. I have a spare bulb already, because downtime was indeed something I wanted to prevent, but it's the exact same lamp. Still, I can try this, you never know.

So far I have only tried to contact adox through their facebook page and they have not responded yet. I will contact them more directly when I have ruled out the enlarger lamp (although I am not sure how, might need a different kind then??) and when I've done the test with fiber based paper. If that paper doesn't work either there's something really weird going on OR I am really unlucky and I bought two packs of paper- not in the same buy even- that were labelled erroneously... If that's the case I am never ever buying adox again. Really unacceptable to me, for a premium brand to mess things up like this. But I want to be sure. I don't like pointing fingers if I haven't tried to be as sure as possible.

[Rangefinderfreak]

I think you could contact Fotohuis Robert Vonk in Netherlands and send them the Adox box for test. He is a nice guy and will help you out !
http://www.fotohuisrovo.nl/

(As a side note: he does NOT deal with Adox paper, neither do I, as I don`t like gambling...)

[MartinP]

Originally Posted by Rangefinderfreak

I think you could contact Fotohuis Robert Vonk in Netherlands and send them the Adox box for test. He is a nice guy and will help you out !

Agreed, but he doesn't sell Adox papers (lots of Foma though) so he might be the wrong stockist for this particular problem!

[Rangefinderfreak]

Originally Posted by MartinP

Agreed, but he doesn't sell Adox papers (lots of Foma though) so he might be the wrong stockist for this particular problem!

What I was saying: He might help this lady to check out the possible defect, because of sheer interest, not that he would substitute the product. If I would live closer, I`d do the same !! ( I live in Helsinki/Finland...)

[MartinP]

Originally Posted by Rangefinderfreak

What I was saying: He might help this lady to check out the possible defect, because of sheer interest, not that he would substitute the product. If I would live closer, I`d do the same !! ( I live in Helsinki/Finland...)

Exactly - sorry, I didn't know if you knew which brands are stocked! Ravenstein is a long way from Helsinki after all

[Rangefinderfreak]

Originally Posted by MartinP

Exactly - sorry, I didn't know if you knew which brands are stocked! Ravenstein is a long way from Helsinki after all

hehe, actually I have Robert`s phone No in my mobile, but I think it is inapropirate to post it here...